Proposed Rule2025-12172

Miscellaneous Revisions to the Qualification and Certification of Locomotive Engineers

Primary source

Metadata and text below are from the Federal Register, a public-domain U.S. government work. Always verify the official published version before relying on it for any legal matter.

Published
July 1, 2025

Issuing agencies

Transportation DepartmentFederal Railroad Administration

Abstract

This proposed rule would update FRA's locomotive engineer certification requirements by reducing the information that is required on an engineer's certificate and allowing certificates to be electronic. FRA is also proposing changes to the certification revocation process and the Administrative Hearing Officer (AHO) process. Lastly, FRA is proposing other administrative updates including revising definitions and correcting errors in the regulatory text.

Full Text

<html>
<head>
<title>Federal Register, Volume 90 Issue 124 (Tuesday, July 1, 2025)</title>
</head>
<body><pre>
[Federal Register Volume 90, Number 124 (Tuesday, July 1, 2025)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 28672-28676]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [<a href="http://www.gpo.gov">www.gpo.gov</a>]
[FR Doc No: 2025-12172]



[[Page 28672]]

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Railroad Administration

49 CFR Part 240

[Docket No. FRA-2025-0132]
RIN 2130-AD60


Miscellaneous Revisions to the Qualification and Certification of 
Locomotive Engineers

AGENCY: Federal Railroad Administration (FRA), Department of 
Transportation (DOT).

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM).

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: This proposed rule would update FRA's locomotive engineer 
certification requirements by reducing the information that is required 
on an engineer's certificate and allowing certificates to be 
electronic. FRA is also proposing changes to the certification 
revocation process and the Administrative Hearing Officer (AHO) 
process. Lastly, FRA is proposing other administrative updates 
including revising definitions and correcting errors in the regulatory 
text.

DATES: Comments on the proposed rule must be received by September 2, 
2025. FRA may consider comments received after that date, but only to 
the extent practicable.

ADDRESSES: 
    Comments: Comments related to Docket No. FRA-2025-0132 may be 
submitted by going to <a href="https://www.regulations.gov">https://www.regulations.gov</a> and following the 
online instructions for submitting comments.
    Instructions: All submissions must include the agency name, docket 
number (FRA-2025-0132), and Regulatory Identification Number (RIN) for 
this rulemaking (2130-AD60). All comments received will be posted 
without change to <a href="https://www.regulations.gov">https://www.regulations.gov</a>; this includes any 
personal information. Please see the Privacy Act heading in the 
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section of this document for Privacy Act 
information related to any submitted comments or materials.
    Docket: For access to the docket to read background documents or 
comments received, go to <a href="https://www.regulations.gov">https://www.regulations.gov</a> and follow the 
online instructions for accessing the docket.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Christian Holt, Staff Director-
Operating Practices Division, Federal Railroad Administration, 
telephone: 202-366-0978, email: <a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#1073786279636479717e3e787f7c6450747f643e777f66"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="e182899388929588808fcf898e8d95a1858e95cf868e97">[email&#160;protected]</span></a>; or Michael C. 
Spinnicchia, Attorney Adviser, Federal Railroad Administration, 
telephone: 202-713-7671, email: <a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#3e53575d565f5b52104d4e575050575d5d56575f7e5a514a10595148"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="14797d777c7571783a67647d7a7a7d77777c7d7554707b603a737b62">[email&#160;protected]</span></a>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Background

    Consistent with the deregulatory agenda of President Donald J. 
Trump and Secretary of Transportation Sean P. Duffy, which seeks to 
unleash America's economic prosperity without compromising 
transportation safety, FRA is reviewing its regulatory requirements in 
parts 200 through 299 of Title 49, Code of Federal Regulations (CFR). 
The requirements for FRA-regulated entities to certify locomotive 
engineers are established in 49 CFR part 240, ``Qualification and 
Certification of Locomotive Engineers.'' Some of the requirements 
contained in part 240 could be updated to reduce burdens, make 
technical or conforming changes, ensure due process and 
constitutionality, or otherwise adjust to advancing technology without 
any adverse effect on railroad safety. Please review the SECTION-BY-
SECTION ANALYSIS below for the relevant information related to each 
proposed change.

II. Section-by-Section Analysis

Section 240.7 Definitions

    To be consistent with 49 CFR 209.5, FRA is proposing to amend this 
section by adjusting the definitions for ``File, filed and filing'' and 
``Serve or service.'' In this rule, FRA would amend the definition of 
``File, filed and filing'' to mean submission of a document under this 
part on the date when the DOT Docket Clerk or FRA receives it, or if 
served as that term is defined under 49 CFR 209.5, the date of service. 
FRA also proposes adding a comma after the word ``filed.'' Further, FRA 
proposes amending the definition of ``Serve or service,'' in the 
context of serving documents, to have the meaning given in Sec.  209.5.

Section 240.11 Penalties and Consequences for Noncompliance

    FRA is proposing to amend paragraph (a) of this section by 
replacing references to specific penalty amounts with general 
references to the minimum civil monetary penalty, ordinary maximum 
civil monetary penalty, and aggravated maximum civil monetary penalty. 
FRA is proposing to add language to this section referring readers to 
49 CFR part 209, appendix A, where FRA specifies statutorily provided 
civil penalty amounts updated for inflation. FRA is also proposing to 
amend this section to update the web address from <a href="http://www.fra.dot.gov">www.fra.dot.gov</a> to 
<a href="https://railroads.dot.gov/">https://railroads.dot.gov/</a>.

Section 240.103 Approval of Design of Individual Railroad Programs by 
FRA

    This section explains the approval process for a railroad's 
locomotive engineer certification program. Paragraphs (b)(1) and (b)(2) 
and the introductory text of paragraph (c) currently refer to 
resubmissions filed pursuant to paragraph (f) of this section and 
material modifications filed pursuant to paragraph (g) of this section. 
However, these cross-references are incorrect as paragraph (g) of this 
section discusses the process for resubmitting a certification program 
and paragraph (h) addresses material modifications. Therefore, FRA is 
proposing to correct these cross-references in paragraphs (b)(1) and 
(b)(2) and the introductory text of paragraph (c).

Section 240.217 Time Limitations for Making Determinations

    Paragraph (a) of this section currently lists five scenarios where 
a railroad shall not certify or recertify a person as a locomotive 
engineer. Paragraph (a)(3) states railroads cannot make certification 
decisions based on a knowledge examination that was conducted more than 
366 days before the date of the railroad's certification decision. 
Paragraph (a)(4) is intended to provide an exception to paragraph 
(a)(3) that allows for railroads to rely on knowledge examinations 
performed in the 24 months prior to the certification decision if the 
railroad administers its knowledge testing program at intervals that do 
not exceed 24 months.\1\ However, the way this section is written, a 
railroad that conducts its knowledge testing exams on a two-year cycle 
would still be prohibited from relying on a knowledge exam performed 
more than 366 days before the certification decision under paragraph 
(a)(3). This is a clear drafting error that does not conform with the 
intent of the regulation and makes paragraph (a)(4) superfluous. 
Therefore, FRA is proposing to amend paragraph (a)(3) to add ``except 
as provided for in paragraph (a)(4) of this section'' at the end of the 
paragraph to clarify that paragraph (a)(4) provides an exception to the 
limitation in paragraph (a)(3).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ 84 FR 20472, 20485 (May 9, 2019).

---------------------------------------------------------------------------

[[Page 28673]]

Section 240.223 Criteria for the Certificate

    As part of the requirement that locomotive engineers be certified, 
railroads must issue certificates to those individuals that they 
certify. This section details what information must be included in 
these certificates.
    Paragraph (a)(3) of this section states that the certificate must 
identify the person to whom the certificate is being issued. This must 
include the person's name, employee identification number, the year of 
birth, and either a physical description or photograph of the person. 
FRA is proposing to remove the requirement that the certificate include 
the person's year of birth.
    In 2023, FRA issued NPRMs proposing the establishment of 
certification requirements for dispatchers and signal employees.\2\ The 
Association of American Railroads (AAR) and the American Short Line and 
Regional Railroad Association (ASLRRA) submitted joint comments to both 
NPRMs requesting that FRA remove the year of birth requirement from 
dispatcher and signal employee certificates.\3\ In support of their 
comment, AAR and ASLRRA noted that a person's birth year provides 
little to no assistance in confirming a person's identity and there are 
other ways, such as a physical description or photograph that better 
serve this purpose. When FRA issued the final rules establishing 
dispatcher and signal employee certification, the agency agreed with 
AAR and ASLRRA's rationale that it was unnecessary to include the year 
of birth on the certificates and this requirement was removed from the 
final rules.\4\ For similar reasons, FRA is proposing removing the 
requirement that a person's year of birth be included on their 
locomotive engineer certificate.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \2\ 88 FR 35574 (May 31, 2023); 88 FR 35632 (May 31, 2023).
    \3\ FRA-2022-0019-0041; FRA-2022-0020-0035.
    \4\ 89 FR 44766, 44789 (May 21, 2024); 89 FR 44830, 44859 (May 
21, 2024).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Paragraph (a)(8) of this section states the certificate must be 
sufficiently small to permit being carried in an ordinary pocket 
wallet. FRA is proposing amending this paragraph to allow railroads to 
issue electronic certificates. Section 240.301(b) already provides for 
railroads to issue temporary replacement certificates electronically 
and FRA does not find any safety concerns with extending this allowance 
to the certificates issued under this section. Electronic certificates 
will allow for railroads to issue certificates more efficiently while 
also making it much less likely that a railroad would have to issue a 
replacement certificate under Sec.  240.301. Lastly, while FRA is not 
proposing any revisions to paragraph (a)(6) of this section, which 
requires that a certificate be signed by a supervisor of locomotive 
engineers or other designated individual, based on the proposed 
revision to paragraph (a)(8), it logically follows that FRA would allow 
for electronic signatures under this proposed rule.

Section 240.307 Revocation of Certification

    Many railroads issue their written decisions to revoke a person's 
certification without findings of fact and a clear application of the 
regulation. That approach conflicts with an existing requirement in 
paragraph (c)(11) of this section which requires that each railroad 
decision must include ``the findings of fact as well as the basis 
therefor, concerning all material issues of fact presented on the 
record and citations to all applicable railroad rules and practices.'' 
Although paragraph (d) allows a railroad to use hearing procedures 
under an applicable collective bargaining agreement, and such an 
agreement might not contain the same or similar requirements as in 
paragraph (c)(11), including findings of fact is normally what would be 
expected in such a decision. Thus, a railroad's failure to include such 
basic information in a decision has led to an inefficient and more 
complicated process. For instance, a railroad's failure to include 
findings of fact in its revocation decision means that the person who 
is challenging the decision cannot quickly and effectively pinpoint 
whether the basis for the parties' disagreement is based on a 
misunderstanding or material disagreement of the facts.
    FRA's Operating Crew Review Board (OCRB), which is delegated the 
authority to review a person's challenge to a railroad's revocation 
decision, has similarly been less efficient in its review because it 
must spend an inordinate amount of time dissecting the evidentiary 
record in a way that exceeds the appropriate, accelerated consideration 
of a case envisioned by this certification review. Railroads often 
include findings of fact in their responses to petitions filed with the 
OCRB, but that is too late in the process to give the affected engineer 
an opportunity to consider the findings of fact and respond. To obviate 
this inefficient process, FRA proposes to revise paragraph (d) of this 
section to clarify that written findings of fact and application of the 
regulation must always be provided in a railroad's written decision 
prior to consideration of a case before the OCRB, regardless of any 
alternative requirement provided in a collective bargaining agreement. 
This amendment would be deregulatory insofar as it provides required 
information to the affected person earlier in the certification 
revocation process, ensuring due process for locomotive engineers 
subject to the certification requirements in part 240, and increasing 
efficiency of the process.

Section 240.409 Hearings

    Executive Order (E.O.) 14219, Ensuring Lawful Governance and 
Implementing the President's ``Department of Government Efficiency'' 
Deregulatory Initiative (90 FR 10583, Feb. 19, 2025), requires agencies 
to review regulations for a variety of concerns and rescind or modify 
such regulations identified. This section raises concerns due to its 
potential shifting of the burden of proof. The existing regulation 
grants a party adversely affected by an OCRB decision the right to a de 
novo hearing before an AHO with more robust evidentiary and procedural 
protections than the expedited OCRB proceeding but shifts the burden of 
proof at this AHO hearing stage to the party that was adversely 
affected by the OCRB decision. In cases where the locomotive engineer 
or locomotive engineer candidate was the party adversely affected by 
the preceding OCRB decision, the burden of proof at the AHO hearing 
stage currently shifts to the impacted engineer/engineer candidate.
    To correct for this concern, FRA proposes to amend paragraph (q) of 
this section to clarify that the railroad taking a certification action 
is always the hearing petitioner at the AHO hearing stage and always 
bears the burden of proof by a preponderance of the evidence. FRA 
acknowledges that while this approach provides additional protections 
for a locomotive engineer or locomotive engineer candidate who has been 
subject to a denial or revocation of certification with related impacts 
on his or her livelihood, this burden could now shift to railroads. 
However, FRA expects the burden to be negligible. FRA requests comments 
on the extent of this shift in burden and any potential impacts.
    Paragraph (r) of this section notes that FRA will be a mandatory 
party to the administrative hearing and will be a respondent at the 
start of the hearing. FRA is proposing to delete the requirement that 
FRA be a respondent at the start of each proceeding. Under the proposed 
revisions to paragraph (q) of this section, the hearing respondent

[[Page 28674]]

would always be the engineer or engineer candidate. FRA is more likely 
to align with the party who received a favorable decision before the 
OCRB, which could be, with the proposed changes to paragraph (q), 
either the petitioner or respondent at the AHO hearing stage. 
Therefore, it would no longer make sense for FRA to always be the 
respondent at the AHO hearing stage.
    FRA is also requesting comments on whether it should remove 
paragraph (r) in its entirety and no longer require that FRA be a 
mandatory party to the administrative hearing.
    Lastly, under these proposed changes, if FRA is a mandatory party 
and agrees with the railroad, FRA would be considered a hearing 
petitioner. However, in such circumstances, FRA would not be 
responsible for presenting any evidence, through witness testimony or 
exhibits, in support of the railroad's case. That responsibility would 
remain with the railroad.

III. Regulatory Impact and Notices

A. E.O. 12866 (Regulatory Planning and Review) and DOT Regulatory 
Policies and Procedures

    FRA has considered the impact of this NPRM under E.O. 12866 (58 FR 
51735, Oct. 4, 1993), Regulatory Planning and Review, and DOT 
Regulatory Policies and Procedures. The Office of Information and 
Regulatory Affairs within the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) 
determined that this NPRM is not a significant regulatory action under 
section 3(f) of E.O. 12866.
    FRA expects this NPRM would update FRA's locomotive engineer 
certification requirements by reducing the information that is required 
on an engineer's certificate and by allowing certificates to be 
electronic and proposes other administrative updates including revising 
definitions and correcting errors in the regulatory text. While some 
additional burdens may be added from the proposed changes to the 
revocation of certification requirements, FRA estimates that the 
overall benefits of this proposed rule would outweigh any potential 
burdens. Moreover, this proposed rule would provide additional benefits 
to regulated entities and the U.S. government, by clarifying, 
simplifying, and updating the language of part 240. This rule would 
also decrease the information requested on an engineer's certificate. 
FRA requests any comments from the public on the impacts of this 
proposed rule.

B. E.O. 14192 (Unleashing Prosperity Through Deregulation)

    E.O. 14192, Unleashing Prosperity Through Deregulation (90 FR 9065, 
Jan. 31, 2025), requires that for ``each new [E.O. 14192 regulatory 
action] issued, at least ten prior regulations be identified for 
elimination.'' \5\ Implementation guidance for E.O. 14192 issued by OMB 
(Memorandum M-25-20, Mar. 26, 2025) defines an E.O. 14192 deregulatory 
action as ``an action that has been finalized and has total costs less 
than zero.'' \6\ This proposed rulemaking is expected to have total 
costs less than zero, and therefore, if finalized, it would be 
considered an E.O. 14192 deregulatory action. While FRA affirms that 
each amendment proposed in this NPRM has a cost that is negligible or 
``less than zero'' consistent with E.O. 14192, FRA still requests 
comment on the extent of the cost savings for the changes proposed in 
this NPRM.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ Executive Office of the President. Executive Order 14192 of 
January 31, 2025. Unleashing Prosperity Through Deregulation. 90 FR 
9065-9067. Feb. 6, 2025.
    \6\ Executive Office of the President. Office of Management and 
Budget. Guidance Implementing Section 3 of Executive Order 14192, 
Titled ``Unleashing Prosperity Through Deregulation.'' Memorandum M-
25-20. March 26, 2025.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

C. Regulatory Flexibility Act and E.O. 13272

    The Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.), as amended 
by the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996,\7\ 
requires Federal agencies to consider the effects of the regulatory 
action on small business and other small entities and to minimize any 
significant economic impact. Accordingly, DOT policy requires an 
analysis of the impact of all regulations on small entities, and 
mandates that agencies strive to lessen any adverse effects on these 
businesses. The term small entities comprises small businesses and not-
for-profit organizations that are independently owned and operated and 
are not dominant in their fields, and governmental jurisdictions with 
populations of less than 50,000 (5 U.S.C. 601(6)).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ Public Law 104-121, 110 Stat. 857 (Mar. 29, 1996).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    No regulatory flexibility analysis is required, however, if the 
head of an Agency or an appropriate designee certifies that the rule 
will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of 
small entities. This proposed rule would not preclude small entities 
from continuing existing practices that comply with part 240; it merely 
offers clarity and updates that could result in benefits, if a small 
entity or other regulated entity chooses to utilize those 
flexibilities. By extending this regulatory relief, many regulated 
entities, including small entities, would experience some benefits. 
Consequently, FRA certifies that the proposed action would not have a 
significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities.
    In accordance with section 213(a) of the Small Business Regulatory 
Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996 (Pub. L. 104-121, 110 Stat. 857), FRA 
wants to assist small entities in understanding this proposed rule so 
they can better evaluate its effects on themselves and participate in 
the rulemaking initiative. If the proposed rule would affect your small 
business, organization, or governmental jurisdiction and you have 
questions concerning its provisions or options for compliance, please 
consult the person listed under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT.

D. Paperwork Reduction Act

    This proposed rule offers regulatory flexibilities, and there is no 
new information collection requirement, in accordance with the 
Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 U.S.C. 3501 et seq., therefore, an 
information collection submission to OMB is not required. The 
recordkeeping and reporting requirements already contained in Part 240 
became effective when it was approved by OMB on July 12, 2024. The OMB 
approval number is 2130-0533, which expires on July 31, 2027.

E. Environmental Assessment

    FRA has analyzed this rule for the purposes of the National 
Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA). In accordance with 42 U.S.C. 
4336 and DOT NEPA Order 5610.1C, FRA has determined that this rule is 
categorically excluded pursuant to 23 CFR 771.118(c)(4), ``[p]lanning 
and administrative activities that do not involve or lead directly to 
construction, such as: [p]romulgation of rules, regulations, and 
directives.'' This rulemaking is not anticipated to result in any 
environmental impacts, and there are no unusual or extraordinary 
circumstances present in connection with this rulemaking.

F. Federalism Implications

    This proposed rule will not have a substantial effect on the 
States, on the relationship between the national government and the 
States, or on the distribution of power and responsibilities among the 
various levels of government. Thus, in accordance with E.O. 13132,

[[Page 28675]]

``Federalism'' (64 FR 43255, Aug. 10, 1999), preparation of a 
Federalism Assessment is not warranted.

G. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995

    This proposed rule would not result in the expenditure, in the 
aggregate, of $100,000,000 or more, adjusted for inflation, in any one 
year by State, local, or Indian Tribal governments, or the private 
sector. Thus, consistent with section 202 of the Unfunded Mandates 
Reform Act of 1995 (Pub. L. 104-4, 2 U.S.C. 1532), FRA is not required 
to prepare a written statement detailing the effect of such an 
expenditure.

H. Energy Impact

    E.O. 13211 requires Federal agencies to prepare a Statement of 
Energy Effects for any ``significant energy action.'' \8\ FRA has 
evaluated this proposed rule in accordance with E.O. 13211 and 
determined that this proposed rule is not a ``significant energy 
action'' within the meaning of E.O. 13211.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \8\ 66 FR 28355 (May 22, 2001).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

I. E.O. 13175 (Tribal Consultation)

    FRA has evaluated this proposed rule in accordance with the 
principles and criteria contained in E.O. 13175, Consultation and 
Coordination with Indian Tribal Governments, dated November 6, 2000. 
The proposed rule would not have a substantial direct effect on one or 
more Indian tribes, would not impose substantial direct compliance 
costs on Indian tribal governments, and would not preempt tribal laws. 
Therefore, the funding and consultation requirements of E.O. 13175 do 
not apply, and a tribal summary impact statement is not required.

J. International Trade Impact Assessment

    The Trade Agreement Act of 1979 \9\ prohibits Federal agencies from 
engaging in any standards or related activities that create unnecessary 
obstacles to the foreign commerce of the United States. Legitimate 
domestic objectives, such as safety, are not considered unnecessary 
obstacles. The statute also requires consideration of international 
standards and, where appropriate, that they be the basis for U.S. 
standards. This rulemaking is purely domestic in nature and is not 
expected to affect trade opportunities for U.S. firms doing business 
overseas or for foreign firms doing business in the United States.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \9\ 19 U.S.C. Ch. 13.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

K. Privacy Act Statement

    In accordance with 5 U.S.C. 553(c), DOT solicits comments from the 
public to better inform its rulemaking process. DOT posts these 
comments, without edit, to <a href="http://www.regulations.gov">http://www.regulations.gov</a>, as described in 
the system of records notice, DOT/ALL-14 FDMS, accessible through 
<a href="http://www.transportation.gov/privacy">www.transportation.gov/privacy</a>. To facilitate comment tracking and 
response, we encourage commenters to provide their name, or the name of 
their organization; however, submission of names is completely 
optional. Whether or not commenters identify themselves, all timely 
comments will be fully considered. If you wish to provide comments 
containing proprietary or confidential information, please contact the 
agency for alternate submission instructions.

L. Rulemaking Summary

    As required by 5 U.S.C. 553(b)(4), a summary of this rule can be 
found at <a href="http://regulations.gov">regulations.gov</a>, Docket No. FRA-2025-0132, in the SUMMARY 
section of this proposed rule.

List of Subjects in 49 CFR Part 240

    Administrative practice and procedure, Locomotive engineer, 
Penalties, Railroad employees, Railroad operating procedures, Railroad 
safety, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.

The Proposed Rule

    For the reasons discussed in the preamble, FRA proposes to amend 
part 240 of chapter II, subtitle B of title 49, Code of Federal 
Regulations as follows:

PART 240--QUALIFICATION AND CERTIFICATION OF LOCOMOTIVE ENGINEERS

0
1. The authority citation for part 240 continues to read as follows:

    Authority:  49 U.S.C. 20103, 20107, 20135, 21301, 21304, 21311; 
28 U.S.C. 2461 note; and 49 CFR 1.89.

0
2. In Sec.  240.7, revise the definitions of ``File, filed and filing'' 
and ``Serve or service'' to read as follows:


Sec.  240.7  Definitions.

* * * * *
    File, filed, and filing mean submission of a document under this 
part on the date when the DOT Docket Clerk or FRA receives it, or if 
served as that term is defined under 49 CFR 209.5, the date of service.
* * * * *
    Serve or service, in the context of serving documents, has the 
meaning given in 49 CFR 209.5. The computation of time provisions in 
Rule 6 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure as amended are also 
applicable in this part. See also the definition of ``file, filed, and 
filing'' in this section.
* * * * *
0
3. Revise Sec.  240.11(a) to read as follows:


Sec.  240.11  Penalties and consequences for noncompliance.

    (a) A person who violates any requirement of this part or causes 
the violation of any such requirement is subject to a civil penalty of 
at least the minimum civil monetary penalty and not more than the 
ordinary maximum civil monetary penalty per violation. However, 
penalties may be assessed against individuals only for willful 
violations, and a penalty not to exceed the aggravated maximum civil 
monetary penalty per violation may be assessed, where: (1) a grossly 
negligent violation, or a pattern of repeated violations, has created 
an imminent hazard of death or injury to persons, or (2) a death or 
injury has occurred. See 49 CFR part 209, appendix A. Each day a 
violation continues shall constitute a separate offense. See FRA's 
website at <a href="https://railroads.dot.gov/">https://railroads.dot.gov/</a> for a statement of agency civil 
penalty policy.
* * * * *
0
4. Revise Sec.  240.103(b)(1), (b)(2), and (c) introductory text to 
read as follows:


Sec.  240.103  Approval of design of individual railroad programs by 
FRA.

* * * * *
    (b) * * *
    (1) Simultaneous with its filing with FRA, provide a copy of the 
submission filed pursuant to paragraph (a) of this section, a 
resubmission filed pursuant to paragraph (g) of this section, or a 
material modification filed pursuant to paragraph (h) of this section 
to the president of each labor organization that represents the 
railroad's employees subject to this part; and
    (2) Include in its submission filed pursuant to paragraph (a) of 
this section, a resubmission filed pursuant to paragraph (g) of this 
section, or a material modification filed pursuant to paragraph (h) of 
this section a statement affirming that the railroad has provided a 
copy to the president of each labor organization that represents the 
railroad's employees subject to this part, together with a list of the 
names and addresses of persons provided a copy.
    (c) Not later than 45 days from the date of filing a submission 
pursuant to paragraph (a) of this section, a resubmission pursuant to 
paragraph (g) of this section, or a material modification pursuant to 
paragraph (h)

[[Page 28676]]

of this section, any designated representative of railroad employees 
subject to this part may comment on the submission, resubmission, or 
material modification.
* * * * *
0
5. Revise Sec.  240.217(a)(3) to read as follows:


Sec.  240.217  Time limitations for making determinations.

    (a) * * *
    (3) Demonstrated knowledge and the knowledge examination being 
relied on was conducted more than 366 days before the date of the 
railroad's certification decision except as provided for in paragraph 
(a)(4) of this section;
* * * * *
0
6. Revise Sec.  240.223(a)(3) and (8) to read as follows:


Sec.  240.223  Criteria for the certificate.

    (a) * * *
    (3) Identify the person to whom it is being issued (including the 
person's name, employee identification number, and either a physical 
description or photograph of the person);
* * * * *
    (8) Be electronic or be of sufficiently small size to permit being 
carried in an ordinary pocket wallet.
* * * * *
0
7. Revise Sec.  240.307(d) to read as follows:


Sec.  240.307  Revocation of certification.

* * * * *
    (d) A hearing required by this section which is conducted in a 
manner that conforms procedurally to the applicable collective 
bargaining agreement shall be deemed to satisfy the procedural 
requirements of this section except that the railroad's decision must 
comply with the requirements in paragraph (c)(11) of this section.
* * * * *
0
8. Revise Sec.  240.409(q) and (r) to read as follows:


Sec.  240.409  Hearings.

* * * * *
    (q) Regardless of the prevailing party before the Operating Crew 
Review Board, the railroad involved in taking the certification action 
shall be the ``hearing petitioner'' and shall have the burden of 
proving its case by a preponderance of the evidence. The impacted 
locomotive engineer or locomotive engineer candidate shall be the 
``hearing respondent.''
    (r) FRA will be a mandatory party to the administrative hearing.
* * * * *

    Issued in Washington, DC.
Kyle D. Fields,
Chief Counsel.
[FR Doc. 2025-12172 Filed 6-27-25; 4:15 pm]
BILLING CODE 4910-06-P


</pre><script data-cfasync="false" src="/cdn-cgi/scripts/5c5dd728/cloudflare-static/email-decode.min.js"></script></body>
</html>
Indexed from Federal Register on July 1, 2025.

This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.